4. JOHN KEY (National—Helensville) Link to this
to the Minister of Finance
Which Ministers and which Air New Zealand executives were present, for all or part of the time, at the dinner held at the Boulcott Street Bistro on 13 March 2006?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) Link to this
The Ministers were myself; the Minister of Commerce, Lianne Dalziel; the Minister of Tourism, Damien O’Connor; and, for part of the time, the Minister of Transport, David Parker. The only Air New Zealand executive present was Rob Fyfe.
Does he agree with Air New Zealand’s chairman, John Palmer, who said over dinner that “The issue of the Tasman and, particularly, the impact of Emirates on the Tasman were certainly discussed.”; if so, what issues relating to the Tasman were discussed that night?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I can confirm that Mr Palmer also said the issue of code-sharing was not discussed. The issue of Emirates Airline was discussed, because, of course, it had been having a severe impact upon Air New Zealand on the trans-Tasman route. Air New Zealand had proposals around joint Government - Air New Zealand action to promote tourism.
R Doug WoolertonDoes the Minister believe that it is better to have dinner in a public place and discuss Air New Zealand and the welfare of the country, or to have discussions with the Exclusive Brethren behind closed doors?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
If I were to sup with members of the Brethren, I am sure they would bring a very long spoon, at least.
Did anyone present at the dinner raise or discuss any of the points relating to the Tasman route that chief executive officer Rob Fyfe has previously raised: that Air New Zealand is losing tens of millions of dollars annually, that too many empty seats are hurting Air New Zealand’s profitability, or that Air New Zealand could make a profit on the Tasman if some of the planes were taken off the route?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I can confirm that what was discussed was that Emirates Airline has an impact upon Air New Zealand—primarily, of course, because that airline avoids downtime in Sydney by going backwards and forwards across the Tasman at marginal pricing. That, of course, is why the member opposite supports the code-sharing arrangement, unlike his leader, who opposes it.
Can the Minister confirm that Emirates Airline is a competitor of Air New Zealand and Qantas on the Tasman route; when those present at the dinner discussed the impact of Emirates Airline, did anyone make the point that Rob Fyfe has been making publicly, which is that stiff competition from airlines like Emirates Airline is one of the key reasons that Air New Zealand’s Tasman routes are in their present form unviable, and hence a solution to that problem needs to be found?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
The reason why Mr O’Connor was there, as I am sure Opposition members have begun to grasp, is that the discussion was around how the Government and Air New Zealand might work better together in terms of tourism promotion. The Government had its own proposals at that point in time. If the member finally gets around to asking the right question, he may find out what that proposal was.
If no one at the dinner talked about competition on the trans-Tasman routes, about the viability of Air New Zealand’s current schedules, or about the possible solutions to Air New Zealand’s problems, does that not make a mockery of—
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I realise that the member is reading from a prepared question, but he has already received an assurance that competition on the Tasman route between Emirates Airline and Air New Zealand was discussed. Therefore, to preface a question with: “If that was not discussed …” must be to doubt the word of the Minister.
Madam SPEAKERI think that is a very long bow. The member can ask the same question twice, and presumably there will a response to that question.
If no one at the dinner talked about competition on the trans-Tasman routes, about the viability of Air New Zealand’s current schedules, or about possible solutions to Air New Zealand’s problems, does that not make a mockery of the statements of the Air New Zealand chairman that the issue of the Tasman was certainly discussed; or does he expect the people of New Zealand to believe his recollection of events over that of John Palmer?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
The problem with members reading out a prepared question when they do not listen to the answer is that they look like idiots. As I told the member and the House—[ Interruption]
I ask the member to please be seated. I certainly could not hear the answer to the question. I know that members at the back could not hear it, either. As I reminded members yesterday, I am receiving an increasing number of complaints from those who listen to this broadcast but who also cannot hear the answers to questions.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
As I said to the member in my previous answer, the issue of the impact of Emirates Airline as a competitor to Air New Zealand was discussed at the meeting.
Hon Tau HenareWhen the Minister said yesterday that he did not recollect having a discussion on code-sharing, yet John Palmer confirmed there certainly was a discussion on trans-Tasman air services, is that a bit like saying there was no discussion about horses but just one about hoofed quadrupeds that eat oats and all happen to be born on 1 August?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I answered that in my first answer. I can quote from Mr Palmer, who after all did sit on Ruth Richardson’s electorate committee at one point. He said: “I can absolutely confirm that the issue of the code-share application was not discussed.” The member may consider it appropriate to doubt my word, but by also going around doubting John Palmer’s word he will get himself into serious trouble.
Brian ConnellI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I did not want to interrupt the Minister, but prior to his answer my colleague John Key was asking a question. During the course of it, Minister Mallard interrupted him. As you have already issued a final warning, I expect you to ask him to leave the House.
I have also had interruptions during other questions, and I ask members to please respect the Standing Orders about that. Otherwise, there would be no one left in this House.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. As I was finishing my answer, Mr Key interjected, saying he accepted that code-sharing was not discussed. Can I be certain that that will be entered into the Hansard?
I did not say that. I said that I accepted Mr Palmer’s word; I did not necessarily accept the Minister’s.
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I seek leave to table the quotation from Mr John Palmer, where he states that code-sharing was not discussed—the word that Mr Key has just accepted.
I seek leave to table Mr Palmer’s comments, where he says that issues about trans-Tasman air services were certainly discussed.
Peter BrownWill the Minister clarify the situation; is it necessary for Air New Zealand to get the Government’s permission to get involved in a code-sharing arrangement with Qantas; if so, when is it likely that that permission will be granted?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Strictly speaking, I could say that I do not have responsibility for that, but I have received advice on it, obviously. Yes, Air New Zealand does require that permission from the Minister of Transport. Because the Minister of Transport’s electorate includes Wellington Airport and that well-known private sector monopoly has rather strong views on this matter, she has asked my colleague Mr Hodgson to take responsibility for making that decision, which I am sure he will do in the fullness of time and without discussing with me what the decision should be.